On Monday 16 April 2007 23:39, Steve Bakke wrote:
> On 4/16/07 6:27 AM, "Ulrich Eckhardt" <eckhardt@satorlaser.com> wrote:
> > On Friday 13 April 2007 22:34, Matt Pounsett wrote:
> >> ....
> >> The first solution that comes to mind, for me, is having a way to
> >> alter certain working copies so that the .svn meta-data is stored out
> >> of the way somewhere... perhaps within a dot-dir in the user's home
> >> directory. Has any thought been given to having something like this
> >> available as an option at checkout time?
> >
> > My first solution would be to fix the tool that barfs on those .svn dirs.
> > Have you filed a bug report with the vendor? After all, Subversion is
> > rather popular and not being able to interact with it might cost
> > customers.
> >
> > Uli
>
> The version control system should not be the center of the universe. It is
> not an end unto itself. Why does the metadata have to be as intrusive as
> it is? It seems that Subversion follows an implementation similar to CVS
> not because it is a particularly good solution but because CVS users are
> used to it. It's often not an option to change the tools you work with if
> your source data is anything but plain text files. In these situations,
> the primary content creation tool is king and something like revision
> control really is secondary to the actual process.
Steve,
I totally agree to your point that Subversion could provide a non-intrusive
variant of its WC handling (SVK does so, for example, by simply not using
SVN's WC handling library). However, there is one thing which I would
definitely call a bug and that is not in Subversion: a program deleted an
unknown directory which included write-protected files. This is an absolute
no-no! I'm okay with a program that alerts the user to unknown files and
optionally asks for confirmation, but silently deleting data is really poor
behaviour. That said, of course there is room for improvement of interaction,
both in SVN and other apps.
> There are other version control systems that support metadata outside of
> the working copy. Count me as one user who would really like to see support
> for opaque collections as a *minimum* or even better, completely remove the
> metadata from the depths of the working copy directory. A good solution
> I've heard proposed is to store all of the metadata at the root of the
> working copy. (or parallel to the working copy) This way, stuff can be
> deleted, overwritten, etc. and subversion won't get confused like it does
> today. This isn't just an OSX thing.
Right, storing it at the root of the WC would be one thinkable and probably
rather easy solution. The reason its not done is that it is so very simple to
just store related data together. Also, it is convenient that you can't
easily break this relation - if you move a folder of a WC, it remains a
valid WC by itself.
Uli
--
Sator Laser GmbH
Geschäftsführer: Ronald Boers, Amtsgericht Hamburg HR B62 932
**************************************************************************************
Visit our website at <http://www.satorlaser.de/>
**************************************************************************************
Diese E-Mail einschließlich sämtlicher Anhänge ist nur für den Adressaten bestimmt und kann vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie den Absender umgehend, falls Sie nicht der beabsichtigte Empfänger sein sollten. Die E-Mail ist in diesem Fall zu löschen und darf weder gelesen, weitergeleitet, veröffentlicht oder anderweitig benutzt werden.
E-Mails können durch Dritte gelesen werden und Viren sowie nichtautorisierte Änderungen enthalten. Sator Laser GmbH ist für diese Folgen nicht verantwortlich.
**************************************************************************************
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Apr 17 12:10:44 2007